8/21/2019 G.R. No.

93983

Today is Wednesday, August 21, 2019

Custom Search

Constitution Statutes Executive

Republic of the Philippines

SUPREME COURT
Manila

FIRST DIVISION

G.R. No. 93983 June 29, 1992

DAVAO INTEGRATED PORT AND STEVEDORING SERVICES CORPORATION, petitioner,

vs.

ALFREDO C. OLVIDA IN HIS CAPACITY AS VOLUNTARY ARBITRATOR, AND THE ASSOCIATION OF TRA
UNIONS (ATU-TUCP)., respondents.

GRIÑO-AQUINO, J.:p
This petition for certiorari with prayer for the issuance of a temporary restraining order impugns the Decision dated May 19, 1990 of the Voluntary Arbitr
Alfredo C. Olvida, in "Association or Trade Unions (ATU-TUCP) vs. Davao Integrated Port and Stevedoring Services Corporation" (Case No. AC-220-RBX
001-90 in the National Conciliation and Mediation Board, Regional Branch XI. Davao City).

The controversy centers on the interpretation of two provisions of the five-year Collective Bargaining Agreem
(effective April 15, 1989 up to April 14, 1994) between the petitioner, Davao Integrated Port and Stevedor
Services Corporation (or "DIPSSC"), and the respondent, Association of Trade Unions [ATU-TUCP] (the Union,
short). Those provisions are:

1. ARTICLE VIII — SICK, VACATION AND EMERGENCY LEAVES.

Sec. 4 — Emergency Leaves. The Company agrees to grant a maximum or six (6) da
Emergency Leave with pay per calendar year to all regular field workers, covered by t
agreement who have rendered at least six months of service (including overtime)
calendar year, are members of the Regular Labor Pool, upon prior approval by
company. Said Emergency Leave is not cumulative (sic) nor commutable." (pp. 46-
Rollo; Emphasis supplied.)

ARTICLE XVII — SPECIAL PROVISIONS.

Sec. 4 — Union Education and Training Fund. The Company agrees to contribute twe
thousand (P12,000.00) pesos per year to the Union Education and Training Fund. (p.
Rollo.)

The controversy arose when petitioner, through its new Assistant General Manager Benjamin Marzo, insisted t
the above provisions are to be interpreted as:

1. Under Article VIII, Section 4 (Emergency Leave) — that before the intermittent field workers who
members of the Regular Labor Pool can avail of the six (6) days Emergency Leave provided in t
provision, the workers must have rendered at least six months of service per calendar year regardle
of their employment status (i.e., regular or probationary). Thus, all regular (non-intermittent) fi
workers, who belong to the Regular Labor Pool must have rendered at least six months of service
calendar year to be entitled to the six days Emergency Leave Pay. Petitioner pointed out that

https://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1992/jun1992/gr_93983_1992.html 1/3
8/21/2019 G.R. No. 93983

phrase "per calendar year" is used twice in Section 4, the first of which modifies the word "pay" and
second modifies the phrase "who or rendered at least six months of service." (pp. 130-131.) T
entitlement and enjoyment of the emergency leave must be strictly availed in the calendar year
which the six months service was rendered.

2. Under Article XVII, Section 4 (Union Education and Training Fund) — petitioner required that
Union should first prepare and submit a seminar program before it can avail of the Education a
Training Fund of P12,000.00 per annum.

After due hearing, respondent Arbitrator rendered a decision on May 19, 1990, upholding the union's interpretatio
of Article VIII, Section 4 and Article XVII, Section 4, of the Collective Bargaining Agreement. The dispositive port
of the decision reads:

1. The first sentence of Article VIII, Section 4 which read: "The Company agrees to grant maximum
six (6) days Emergency Leave with pay per calendar year to all regular field workers" — refers to
non-intermittent regular field workers who reported for work everyday and therefore the requiremen
six (6) months or 1,248 hours does not apply; whereas, the next sentences which stated the followi
"covered by this agreement who have rendered at least six months (including overtime) per calen
year, are members of the Regular Labor Pool, upon prior approval by the company." — refers
intermittent workers/members of the Regular Labor Pool, whose work depends upon the arrival
vessels in the wharf and therefore must comply [with] the requirement in the agreement, and so bef
it can avail of the six (6) days Emergency Leave with pay must first rendered at least six mon
(including overtime) per calendar year. Once the 1,248 hours (6 months) is complied subject work
can avail the benefit anytime an Emergency occurred and the same condition of 1,248 hours shall
longer apply in the succeeding calendar years.

2. With respect to the other provision of Article XVII, Section 4 of the new CBA — Union Education a
Training Fund — since the language of the agreement is clear and simple the respondent compa
shall comply [with] its obligation by contributing to the Union Education and Training Fund the amo
of Twelve Thousand (P12,000.00) pesos per year at the beginning of each and every year and
P1,000.00 at the end of each and every month during the lifetime of the CBA at the option of
respondent company. Any post signing condition impose by either or the parties that may affect
spontaneous implementation of Article XVII, Section 4 is foreign to the language of the contract. (
139-140. Rollo.)

In this petition for certiorari, petitioner assails the respondent Arbitrator's construction of Section 4, Article VII
emergency leave) and Section 4, Article XVII (on the Union Education and Training Fund) of the CBA.

After deliberating on the divergent views of the parties on the aforementioned controversial provisions of the CB
the Court finds the petitioner's interpretation of Section 4, Article VIII (emergency leave) more logical than
Arbitrator's and the Union's. The provision of the CBA is clear: (1) the employee must be a member of the Regu
Labor Pool; (2) he is entitled to only six (6) days emergency leave with pay per calendar year; and (3) he must ha
rendered service for at least six (6) months during the year when he took his emergency leave. The emergen
leave may be staggered or it may last for any number of days as emergencies arise but the employee is entit
only to six (6) days of emergency leave "with pay" per year. Since the emergency leave is allowed to enable
employee to attend to an emergency in his family or household, it may be taken at any time during the calendar y
but he must render at least six months service for that year to be entitled to collect his wages for the six (6) days
his emergency leave. Since emergencies are unexpected and unscheduled happenings, it would be absurd
require the employee to render six (6) months service before being entitled to take a six-day emergency leave w
pay for it would mean that no emergency leave can be taken by an employee during the first six months o
calendar year.

With regard to the provision on Union Education and Training Fund in Section 4, Article XVII of the CBA,
petitioner's requirement that the Union submit a seminar program for each calendar year before it may claim
company's P12,000 yearly donation to the fund, is not warranted by the terms of the CBA. The Arbitrator did
abuse his discretion in ruling that the respondent company should comply with its obligation to contribute to
Union Education and Training Fund the amount of Twelve Thousand (P12,000.00) pesos per year by paying s
amount to the Union at the beginning of each and every year, or contributing P1,000.00 at the end of each a
every month during the lifetime or the CBA, at the option of the company. As correctly observed by the Arbitrator,
employer's demand for the submission of a seminar program "is foreign to the language of the contract" with
union.

https://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1992/jun1992/gr_93983_1992.html 2/3
8/21/2019 G.R. No. 93983

WHEREFORE, the petition for certiorari is GRANTED. Section 4, Article VIII of the CBA is interpreted to mean t
any employee who is a member of the Regular Labor Pool is entitled to six (6) days emergency leave with pay
calendar year provided he has rendered at least six (6) months service during the year when he took his emergen
leave. The decision of the respondent Voluntary Arbitrator is AFFIRMED in other respects. No costs.

SO ORDERED.

Cruz, Medialdea and Bellosillo, JJ., concur.

The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation

https://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1992/jun1992/gr_93983_1992.html 3/3